linux-kernel - Re: ktime_set() does not check for nanoseconds

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0809011317460.3243@apollo.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:	Mon, 1 Sep 2008 13:20:35 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Matt Fleming <mattjfleming@...glemail.com>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ktime_set() does not check for nanoseconds > one second

On Mon, 1 Sep 2008, Matt Fleming wrote:
> 
> is it intentional that ktime_set() does not check whether the
> nanoseconds argument is greater than the number of nanoseconds in a
> second? I've run into a problem where a value of 1600000000
> nanoseconds was passed as an argument to ktime_set() and the return
> value was then used in a ktime_add() call, which returned an incorrect
> result. Should the caller of ktime_set() make this check or is it
> possible to move this logic in to the function itself?

Yeah, a check for this in ktime_set() might make sense. Currently it's
up to the programmer to provide sane values. :)

Thanks,

	tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/